Tuesday, July 31, 2012

A group of conservative black pastors are responding to President
Barack Obama’s support of same-sex marriage with what they say will be a
national campaign aimed at rallying black Americans to rethink their
overwhelming support of the President, though the group’s leader is
offering few specifics about the effort.The Rev. Williams Owens, who is president and founder of the
Coalition of African-Americans Pastors and the leader of the campaign,
has highlighted opposition to same-sex marriage among African-Americans.
He calls this campaign “an effort to save the family.”

As a lesbian and as a Black lesbian, I am saddened by that. I have no idea why they hate me so or why they want to deny me equality.

I've never even met them.

Why are they so threatened by me?

I didn't realize I was that powerful. Or maybe they're just that much of a scaredy cat.

Tuesday,
July 31, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, the press misreported
yesterday on why the US government gave up the Baghdad police training
facility because the SIGIR was less than clear in his report (to put it
nicely), Baghdad is slammed with twin bombings, July sees more deaths
from violence than June, Total becomes the latest oil company ready to
do business with the KRG, and more.

The
DoS is wisely reducing the PDP's scope and size in the face of weak
Iraq Ministry of Interior (MOI) support. In July 2012, the number of
in-country advisors was reduced to 36: 18 in Baghdad and 18 in Erbil,
down from the 85 advisors supporting the program in January. These
latest reductions steemed, in part, from the MOI's rejection of some
planned PDP training that was to be the centerpiece of the DoS program.
DoS is currently refocusing its training on five technical areas
requested by the MOI.

Along with Iraqi
disinterest, security concerns also affected the program. The Embassy's
Regional Security Office deemed it unsafe for advisors to travel to
Iraqi-controlled facilities in Baghdad on a frequent basis. Thus, the
PDP's advisors conducted more training at the U.S.-controlled Baghdad
Police College Annex (BPAX). DoS constructed significant training and
housing facilities at BPAX at an estimated cost of about $108 million.
But the DoS has decided to close the facility just months after the PDP
started, due to security costs and program revisions. Although BPAX's
facilities will be given to the Iraqis, its closure amounts to a de
facto waste of the estimated $108 million to be invested in its
construction. In addition, DoS contributed $98 million in PDP funds for
constructing the Basrah Consulate so it could be used for PDP training.
It too will not be used because the MOI decided to terminate training
at that location. This brings the total amount of de facto waste in
the PDP -- that is, funds not meaningfully used for the purpose of their
appropriations -- to about $206 million.

I wasn't in the mood for the report yesterday. My attitude was we covered waste in this program last week (see, for example, "Did the US government have 1.5 billion to throw away"
) and the thing everyone was running with was the Baghdad Police
College Annex. That was the headline in piece for piece after piece.

Why is the Police College Annex being given to the Iraqi government?

It's not difficult to explain and it has been explained.

But not in reports yesterday and not in Stuart Bowen's SIGIR report everyone treated as gospel.

This
was addressed in Congressional hearings. And the press needs to pay
attention to what's going on because the reason the Police College Annex
is being handed over? That can effect other US complexes in Iraq.

The June 29th snapshot covered
the most recent hearing on this topic (the June 28th House Oversight
and Government Reform's Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland
Defense and Foreign Operations hearing). Jason Chaffetz is the
Subcommittee Chair but he'd stepped out of the hearing and US House Rep
Black Farenthold was Acting Chair. As he established in his line of
questions (to the State Dept's Patrick Kennedy and Peter Verga and the
State Dept's Acting IG Harold Geisel, DoD's Special Deputy IG for
Southwest Asia Mickey McDermott, US GAO's Michael Courts and SIGIR's
Stuart Bowen Jr.), the US government did not secure a lease for the
land. As Farenthold noted of the Baghdad Police College Annex, "It was
intended to house the police department program -- a multi-billion
dollar effort that's currently being downsized. And as a result of
the State Dept's failure to secure land use rights, the entire facility
is being turned over to the Iraqis at no cost. The GAO reports Mission
Iraq has land use agreements or leases for only 5 out of all of the
sites that it operates." That number has increased by one since that
hearing. From the July 9th snapshot:

The Kurdistan Regional Government really wasn't the concern there. But Sunday the KRG announced
that Foreign Relations Minister Falah Mustafa met with outgoing US
Consul General Alexander Laskaris: "As his last official act in the
Region, prior to the meeting Consul General Laskaris signed an agreement
regarding the allocation of land for the permanent premises of the US
Consulate to be built on. Commenting on this agreement, Mr Laskaris
said, 'We thank the government of Kurdistan for allocating this land as
part of enhancing our permanent diplomatic presence in Iraq including
Baghdad, Basra and Erbil. We look forward to breaking ground and thank
the leadership of the KRG for their continuing support and
partnership'."

AP
and others yesterday wrongly conflated two separate aspects of the
waste. If they'd bothered to attend Congressional hearings, maybe they
wouldn't have. But the police college was not turned over because
people didn't want to participate. That's not the issue on the
turnover. The issue on the turnover is the lack of land-lease
agreements. These should have been in place. They weren't.

Michael
Courts testified in the June 28th hearing referenced above that
"there's still only 5 of 14 [US facilities in Iraq] for which we
actually have explicit title land use agreements or leases."

If
you are alarmed by the waste trumpeted yesterday, then you need to pay
attention to this topic. There are now 6 out of 14 facilities with
agreements. (Courts used "explicit agreements" to draw a line between
actual agreements and the diplomatic notes Patrick Kennedy was trying to
falsely pass off as agreements.)

Point
being, this could happen again and again. This story was completely
missed because the press is not doing the work required.

Article
after article yesterday acted alarmed about the handover of the
building and the numbers they used in the headlines relied largely on
that building. But no one wants to tell you that this could happen with
8 other US buildings in Iraq if the administration doesn't get land
agreements? No one wants to be the one to step up to the plate and
discuss how the administration failed?

In
fairness to the reporters, they're covering a SIGIR report (though
should they be adding context and a bit more in their so-called reports)
and that report makes the same conflation between two separate things.

Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy) speaks
to Bowen and even that doesn't allow Rogin to get it right. For all not
at the June 28th hearing, that's when the American people learned (or
would have if the press attended and reported) that the Baghdad Police
College Annex was being handed over to the Iraqi government and that
this was happening because of the lack of lease agreement.

It
is not because of security concerns -- as Rogin and Bowen discuss. That
was discussed in the hearing as well. That had nothing to do with it.
Issues are being confused and it's hard to believe it's not intentional.

It is not because of the lack of participation by the Iraqi police.

It
is being handed over because no land agreement was finalized and
apparently the White House doesn't think one can be on that area of
land. This is important and to have an honest discussion, people need to
know the issues at play.

Let's deal with
another issue because it goes to failure as well and it didn't happen
this week or last month, it happened months ago but Rogin -- who I'll
assume was trying to be honest on this -- quotes from the SIGIR report,
"Without the MOI [Ministry of Interior]'s written commitment to the
program, there is little reason to have confidence that the training
program currently being planned will be accepted six months from now."

I'm appalled by that statement.

I
don't disagree with it but it's more than a little late for that
statement. This dishonesty's coming from Bowen who I'll assume is under a
lot of pressure and is trying to pretty things up. But why is it
appalling to read a juts-released SIGIR report stating there's no buy-in
by the Ministry of Defense on a police training program?

Ranking
Member Gary Ackerman: He [Bowen] has testified before other bodies of
Congress, he has released written quarterly reports, as well as specific
audits and the message is the same: The program for which the
Department of State officially took responsibility on October 1st is
nearly a text book case of government procurement -- in this case,
foreign assistance -- doesn't buy what we think we're paying for, what
we want and why more money will only make the problem worse. Failed
procurement is not a problem unique to the State Department. And when it
comes to frittering away millions, Foggy Bottom is a rank amateur
compared to the Department of Defense. As our colleagues on the Armed
Services committees have learned, the best of projects with the most
desirable of purposes can go horribly, horribly off-track; and the
hardest thing it seems that any bureaucracy can do is pull the plug on a
failed initiative. How do we know the Police Development Program is
going off-track? Very simple things demonstrate a strong likelihood of
waste and mismanagement. Number one, does the government of Iraq --
whose personnel we intend to train -- support the program? Interviews
with senior Iraqi officials by the Special Inspector General show utter
disdain for the program. When the Iraqis suggest that we take our money
and do things instead that are good for the United States, I think that
might be a clue.

That's
US House Rep Gary Ackerman rightly noting there is no buy-in on the
police training program and that's not last week, that's not last month.
That's last year. That's from the December 1, 2011 snapshot and the
hearing was November 30, 2011. And Stuart Bowen knows these remarks
because he was testifying to the hearing.

Hundreds
of millions have been wasted according to the latest report (billions
have been wasted) and the American tax payer is paying for this
'oversight'? This lack of buy-in was established in Congress last year.
From that House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and
South Asia hearing:

Ranking Member
Gary Ackerman: Number one, does the government of Iraq -- whose
personnel we intend to train -- support the program? Interviews with
senior Iraqi officials by the Special Inspector General show utter
disdain for the program. When the Iraqis suggest that we take our money
and do things instead that are good for the United States, I think that
might be a clue.

The report didn't
uncover anything. It was already known at the end of last year. This
is why Congress was so upset with the stone walling from the
administration. They felt the Iraq goals were not clearly defined, that
the -- wait. We don't need me. Again, Ackerman, from that hearing,
explained the problem was "the program's objectives remain a mushy bowl
of vague platitudes" with "no comprehensive and detailed plan for
execution." He referred to the "flashing-red warning light."

This
is a failure of the administration and the press can't tell you that
because they don't know the story they think they're covering. In part,
that's because Bowen's written an embarrassing report that doesn't
clearly document. In part, that's because they didn't do their jobs.

Adnan
al-Asadi had been questioned by Bowen last year and Bowen was told by
Adnan al-Asadi that they didn't need the US to train Iraqi police. Who
is? Adnan al-Asadi? The Acting Minister of Interior. He's not Minister
of Interior. Nouri never nominated anyone for that position so
Parliament never confirmed anyone. Which means Adnan al-Asadi does what
Nouri tells him to do and serves at Nouri's pleasure. Nouri must have
been pleased with al-Asadi's actions.

Though Nouri was supposed to nominate heads for the security ministries in 2010, he never did. As Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed last
week, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a
lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet
positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national
security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support."
And while those positions have remained vacant, the violence in Iraq
has increased.

Today Baghdad was slammed with bombings. Bushra Juhi (AP) reports two Baghdad car bombings have left 21 dead and fifty-seven injured. RTT News explains,
"The first of the bomb explosions occurred outside a restaurant near
the headquarters of the police major crime division in Baghdad's central
Shiite district of Karrada. Minutes later, a second car bomb exploded
outside a passport office located just a few kilometers away." Aseel Kami and Kareem Raheem (Reuters) quote
police officer Ahmed Hassan, "We were in a patrol when we heard the
first explosion. The second explosion hit another square, and we went
to help . . . There was a minibus with six dead passengers inside it."
The two bombings weren't the only violence today.

On the day Reporters Without Borders notes
6 countries have seen more than one reporter killed in 2012 so far
while 7 -- including Iraq -- have seen at least one killed, Iraq moves
up into the first category. Iraq just moved up to the other category,
the more than one. Bushra Juhi (AP) reports
police announced today that last night in Mosul, Ghazwan Anas was shot
dead in an attack which left his wife and mother injured. Al Rafidayn reports that unknown assailants stormed Anas' home and shot him dead while leaving his wife injured. Xinhua adds
that it was his wife and their 4-month-old child that were injured in
the attack and, "The Iraqi Union of Journalists condemned in a statement
the assassination of Anas and called on Nineveh's Operations Command,
responsible for the security of the province, to exert every effort to
bring the killers to justice. The Union said that more than 280 of its
members and media workers have been killed since the start of the US-led
war in March 2003." In addition, Bahrain News Agency reports an al-Ramadi roadside bombing has claimed the life of 1 police officer and left three more injured. Basil El-Dabh (Daily News Egypt) observes,
"An escalation of violence in Iraq comes with a renewed effort by
Iraqi Al-Qaeda forces to energize its presence in the Anbar province. "
AFP adds
that "two people were killed and three wounded by a car bomb north of
Falluja, a police major in the western province of Anbar and Doctor
Assem al-Hamdani of Fallujah Hospital said."

On the topic of violence, Iraq Body Count
counts 403 deaths from violence through yesterday. That does not
include the violence noted above. The month of July ends in a few hours
and it has already resulted in more deaths than in the month of June.

Open Doors USA recently received this e-mail from one of their contacts in Baghdad:

"The
terror in Iraq recently was the worst for several years. Each hour the
news of what happened gets worse. There have also been major al-Qaeda
threats to everyone, especially the Christians. After last week's
violence, communication is terrible.

"It
is not really possible to describe the devastation here in Baghdad. Over
100 have been killed. Security has been a target. We have none. I came
back early because things were getting worse, and they sure are! We are
all okay, though.

"We are used to bad
problems here in Baghdad, but the violence is just quite unbelievable.
12 car bombs, 2 suicide bombers on motor bikes. Scores of police and
soldiers killed. We no longer have any security. It was all Iraqi police
and soldiers. Whilst our people have not been killed, the injuries are
so severe to so many."

While the e-mailer offers reality, the head of the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq, Amaar al-Hakeem spun like crazy in Kuwait. Nawara Fattahous (Kuwait Times) quotes
al-Hakeem stating, "Compared to two years ago the situation today is
much better. After 150,000 American soldiers withdrew from Iraq, our
government has been working alone to insure security."

Poor
Ammar. To be spanked in public by events of the day must be so
humiliating for him. And he's worked so hard trying to prove he's as
much of a leader as his father was. Then along comes reality, taking
him over the knee and leaving him sobbing.

Al Rafidayn reports
that the US Embassy is using "live ammunition" when training the Iraqi
military (not the police) such as their recent July 17th exercise. The
Embassy issued a statement insisting that this training is covered under
the 2008 Stratgice Framework Agreeement.

If you're picturing
supposed diplomats strapping guns, don't. The mission is overseen by
the US military's Maj Gen Robert Kaslen who is utilizing an undisclosed
number of US forces. But don't say that too loud. Remember Barack lied
to the VFW that all the troops came home. (Truth, thousands were moved
to countries surrounding Iraq. Truth, the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee released a report recently arguing the ones in Kuwait needed
to be left there for some time to come. Truth, Special-Ops, CIA, the
FBI and an undisclosed number of US troops who are 'trainers' remain
in Iraq.)

There is no improved security and
the US military still provides training -- unless Amaar al-Hakeem thinks
Maj Gen Robert Kaslen is just a flight attendent with a fancy title.

Remember
how Nouri still refuses to nominate people to head the security
ministries? That's part of the current, ongoing political stalemate.

This
is Political Stalemate II. In March 2010, parliamentary elections were
held. Nouri was convinced his State of Law would come in first. He
had many reasons to think this. The Justice and Accountability
Commission popped up when it was supposed to be no more and went around
banning various politicians who were seen as rivals of Nouri. They were
falsely charged with being a Ba'athist and they were banned from
running. A large number of Iraqiya members were taken out of the race
as a result. State of Law was a fundamentalist grouping of Shi'ites.
Iraqiya is, like Iraq, a mixture of a little bit of everything. Leader
Ayad Allawi is a Shi'ite. In addition to Iraqiya having members forced
out of the election, in the weeks ahead of the election a number of
Iraqiya candidates and officials were shot dead. Just luck, you
understand, no one's saying Nouri ordered the murders just because he
benefited from them. Pure coincidence. When not 'taking care' of
political rivals, Nouri busied himself bringing water (usually frozen)
to various areas without potable water. He thought that little bribe
had worked so well in 2009's provincial elections so he repeated it.
But his favorite tactic was just to smear Iraqiya as "Ba'athists" and
"terrorists." (Ba'ath was the political party of Saddam Hussein. For
background on the party refer to this BBC News article.)

It
didn't work out the way he'd planned. Iraiqya came in first. He was
runner up. Per the Constitution, Iraqiya was supposed to be given first
crack at forming a government. Nouri wanted a second term as prime
minister and refused to allow anything to move forward. Things ground
to a standstill. For eight months. Nouri couldn't have pulled that off
without the backing of the White House.

In
November 2010, the stalemate finally ended when the US ensured that
Nouri got his way. They brokered the Erbil Agreement which gave all the
blocs something in exchange for their agreeing to allow Nouri to have a
second term. All the leaders of the blocs signed off on the contract
(including Nouri) and Nouri got his second term as prime minister. And
Nouri then refused to honor the Erbil Agreement. He refused to keep the
promises he'd made. Beginning in the summer of last year, the Kurds,
Iraqiya and Moqtada al-Sadr began calling for a return to the Erbil
Agreement.

The
goal of the Erbil accord had been to limit the powers of the prime
minister. It was not to be. Since taking office in December 2010, Maliki
steadily has built up his power, making no concessions to his governing
partners. He has retained control over the interior and defence
ministries as well as of elite military brigades. As a result, Iraqiya
has found itself marginalised in government, its leaders and members
exposed to intimidation and arrest by security forces, often under the
banner of de-Baathification and anti-terrorism. Having campaigned
partially on the promise it would bring such practices to an end,
Iraqiya proved itself powerless in the eyes of its supporters. Matters
came close to breaking point in December 2011, as the last U.S. troops
left the country, when Maliki's government issued an arrest warrant
against Vice President Tareq al-Hashimi, a senior Sunni leader, while
declaring Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlak, another Sunni leader –
both of them from Iraqiya – persona non grata for having referred to
Maliki as a "dictator".

In April 2012,
tensions between Maliki and his governing partners escalated further.
Joining forces, Iraqiya leaders, Barzani and other Kurdish leaders as
well as some of Maliki's Shiite rivals such as the powerful Sadrist
movement, accused the prime minister of violating the Erbil agreement
and amassing power by undemocratic and unconstitutional means. Their
efforts ever since to hold a parliamentary no-confidence vote against
Maliki have been hampered by internal divisions. The crisis is at a
stalemate: Maliki hangs on to power, even enjoying a surge in popularity
in Shiite areas; his rivals lack a viable strategy to unseat him until
the next parliamentary elections, which should take place in 2014. This,
they fear, leaves plenty of time for the prime minister to further
consolidate his hold over the security forces and carry out further
repression to achieve the kind of parliamentary majority in the next
elections that has eluded him so far.

An
emboldened prime minister, growing sectarian tensions and a deeply
mistrustful opposition are a recipe for violent conflict, especially in
light of troubling developments in neighbouring Syria. Iraqis across the
divide express fears that a spiralling sectarian-tinged civil war in
their neighbour could exacerbate tensions at home and usher the country
into another round of sectarian conflict. In a separate report, Crisis
Group has proposed some ways to mitigate the chances of such a scenario.

I
lost hope in Maliki when, in 2008, he deployed the Iraqi Army with
tanks and other heavy weapons to Khanaqin to fight the Peshmargas. We
have problem with this mentality, that instead of dialogue, he believes
in the language of arms. My concern is not for now; it is for the
coming years. If this mentality is allowed to grow this way while he has
power, he will create great problems for Kurdistan and Iraq. According
to the constitutional authority and responsibility that I have (as KRG
president), I did not create new problems when I broke the silence about
this (authoritarian) mentality (in Baghdad) this year, although some
people see it that way. Rather, I only brought issues on the table that have existed for years now but have not been addressed seriously. Many
years have passed since the promise was made to solve the pending
issues (between Kurdistan Region and Bagdad) without taking serious
steps in that direction. No serious steps have been taken for Article
140, or the issue of the budget and the (financial) needs of the
Peshmarga, nor has the draft for oil and gas been passed. Moreover,
Kurdish officers and officials are sidelined and alienated inside the
Iraqi Army. After the Erbil Agreement they always hid themselves
from implementing the articles of the agreement, so, the real
power-sharing term has almost faded away and what has been felt is only
monopolization and a return to the dictatorship mentality. They
ignored all the promises in regard to the internal procedures of the
ministerial council, and only Maliki's unlimited authority could be seen
there in all administrative, security, military and economic aspects,
which is breaching the constitutional definition of the government type
of Iraq, since according to the constitution the head of the government
is the head of the council of ministers and not a prime minister. There
is a large difference between these two terms, since the head of the
council of ministers will follow and execute the internal policies and
procedures of the council and cannot act on his own.

That's from the speech he delivered Saturday which the Kurdish Globe has translated into English. The conflicts between Nouri and the Kurds only increase. Geraldine Amiel (Nasdaq) reports, "Total SA (TOT)
challenged the Iraqi authorities Tuesday as it announced the
acquisition of a 35% interest in two oil-exploration blocks in
Kurdistan, a semi-autonomous region in northern Iraq, just days after
the central government in Baghdad blacklisted Chevron Corp. (CVX) from contracts in the rest of the country after it entered the Kurdish region." Meanwhile the Kurdish Globe notes,
"Oil giant Exxon Mobil announced that it is planning to start its
operations for drilling in six oil fields in the Kurdistan Region.
Chevron, the second largest American oil company after Exxon Mobil, did
not take Baghdad's threats about depriving the company from exploration
and investment opportunities in the centeral and southern oil fields
into consideration and insists on investing in Kurdistan Region's vast
oil reserves."

Meanwhile AFP reports
on the latest round of rumors Nouri and his cronies are spreading about
others: KRG President Massoud Barzani has been caught attempting to buy
weapons from "an unnamed foreign country." Doesn't it all just reek of
"The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."? Starting to understand why Bully Boy bush chose Nouri in the first place? Could
it be true? It could be. Would it matter if it was? The KRG can arm
themselves. That was established when Saddam Hussein was still the
president of Iraq. Nouri al-Maliki may not like it, but they've got
that right and they established that right long before Baghdad fell in
2003 to foreign forces. In other words, unlike Nouri and his chicken
s**t exiles, the Kurds actually participated in their own liberation
(1991). Nouri and the other hens in his squawk party just bitched and
moaned to get other countries to do what they were to chicken to do
themselves and only returned to Iraq after Baghdad fell. What a bunch
of losers. And now, on top of that, they're a bunch of backbiting
gossips?Naturally Iran's Press TV jumps
all over the unsourced story and doesn't bother to weigh the veracity
of the claims. Press TV is almost as pathetic as the Chicken Hawk
Exiles who now rule Iraq.

Alsumaria notes
that State of Law MP Hassan al-Awadi is publicly accusing the KRG of
trying to get weapons. His proof? He's State of Law. They never have
proof. They're lucky to have a functioning brain. Alsumaria notes that Kurdistan Alliance MP Chaun Mohammed Taha is denying the charge.

As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Nouri and his lackeys are also insiting that KRG President Massoud
Barzani is going to be questioned by the Iraqi Parliament. However,
today Alsumaria notes that the Parliament has received no such request to question Barzani.

Nouri's
targets have included office holders and every day citizens. The
latter group was targeted last fall and are being targeted again with
mass arrests. Because they are not 'names,' they are invisible to the
world's press.

One 'name' Nouri's targeted
is Iraq's Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. He has insisted
al-Hashemi is a terrorist. A rather strange accusation when al-Hashemi
has been a vice president since 2006 (this is his second term) and it's
not a charge Nouri wanted to make until after the bulk of US forces
pulled out of the country in December. al-Hashemi's staff have been
rounded up and tortured. At least one bodyguard was tortured to death.
That's the way it goes in Nouri's Iraq and that's the Iraq that Barack
Obama decided to back when he threw the weight of the United States
behind Nouri in 2010.

Margret Griffis (Antiwar.com) notes Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi has a resident permit from Turkey. AKnews adds,
"Today's Zaman reported Monday that the Turkish Interior Ministry has
issued a residence permit to Hashimi so that he would not face legal
troubles for staying in the country."

Monday,
July 30, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Iraqis compete in the
Olympics, KRG President Massoud Barzani gives a major speech, violence
continues in Iraq, peace advocate Cindy Sheehan has been named a running
mate on a presidential ticket, and more.

Starting with the Summer Olympics. They're taking place in London and the official website is here. The NBC website for the Olympics is here and cluttered and poorly put together. If you're looking for anything other than video (live or otherwise) go to the London site
which is easier to navigate and more pleasing to the eye. Apparently
NBC spent so much on the rights to the Olympics, they didn't have any
money left to design a solid website.

Ahmed Abdulkareem Ahmed boxed yesterday. Click here for a Reuters photo of his match with South Africa's Siphiwe Lusizi (photo taken by Murad Sezer). Scott Christ (Bad Left Hook) reports,
"Siphiwe Lusizi (South Africa) def. Ahmed Abdulkareem Ahmed (Iraq),
17-13: Decent fight, and an admirable effort from Ahmed. He gave it all
he had, but Lusizi was better than him. A lot of these fights are
really as simple as that. One guy is just better than the other guy in
these early stages." The official Olympics site notes
that the first time Iraq ever competed in the Olympics were in the 1948
Olympics. And that was also the last time, until this year, that the
Summer Olympics were held in London. Back then, Iraq sent an "11-man
team" for basketball, L. Hasso for the 400 meter run and Ali Salman ran
in the 100 meter and the 200 meter in addition to playing on the
basketball team.

The second photo in the Toronto Sun's "Photos of the Week" is by Suhaib Salem (Reuters) and of Rand al-Mashhadani from Friday's ranking round for women's individual archery.

After the awful opening musical numbers (see Ann's "6 men, 1 woman"), you might think some in London might show some humility. That's not the case. Alsumaria reports that the Telegraph of London has declared that Algeria and Iraq have the worst national anthems. The unsigned article in the Telegraph of London, ranks what they call the ten worst anthems -- Iraq comes in at number seven:

Iraq's
national song, "My Homeland," comes from a poem written by Ibrahim
Touquan, a Palestinian poet, in 1934. Reinstated in 2004 after a
previous anthem reminded residents too much of Saddam Hussein's regime,
the lyrics are rousing but the jaunty melody underplays the seriousness
of the message.

In actual Olympic news, AFP reports
Noor Amer al-Ameri, competing in the shooting competition for Iraq, was
prevented from taking her equpiment on the flight from Baghdad to
Dubai, "Emirati authorities later gave the green light for the pistol to
be transported to Dubai by plane on Wednesday, and pledged that it
would arrive safely in London." Al Mada notes
Noor competed Sunday and came in 46 out of 55, that she was born in
Karbala in 1994 and attends Baghdad University. In the article, an
Iraqi official -- Minister for Youth and Sports Jasim Mohammed Jaafar --
blathers on about how, five to ten years from now, Iraq will have
heroes who compete. That's really insulting. Dana Abdul Razak, for
example, has been shot at while training. The eight who made it are
making history. Instead of Iraqi officials making insulting remarks
about those competing, they might want to take a hard look at themselves
and where they put the emphasis. It wasn't on training. People
shouldn't have to leave their home country to train but that happened.
As is usual in Iraq, a lot of over 40 men were made officials -- some
who look they should be forced to retire -- and they made themselves
the focus. I'm referring to Iraq's official Olympic Committee. Go to the website
and prepare to be insulted. I thought three weeks ago (wrongly), that
this website would provide bios of the athletes and photos. Wrong.
Even now, with the Olympics underway, when you go to the photo exhibit
what you get are a bunch of bald and balding old men, sitting around,
congratulating themselves. If anyone visits the site, it's to see the
athletes, not the officials. That they couldn't grasp that goes a long
way towards explaining where the problem is. It's not with the athletes
competing, it's with the egos of the officials. And many, like Jasim
Moahmmed Jaafar have on claim to sports (engineer) and are only serving
on the Committee because they are exiles like Nouri (Jaafar was an
exile from 1981 to 2003).

All 8 who made it to
the Olympics have much to be proud of. And maybe if the officials ever
do their job, Iraq will be able to compete in a lot more events? But
don't trash the eight who made it to the Olympics. They overcame a
great deal to be there.

In Iraq conflicts continue between the KRG and the Baghdad-based central government. Last week, Rudaw reported,
"On Friday the minitry of Peshmerga said that the Iraqi government had
sent troops to border strip between Syria and the Kurdistan Region and
that 3,000 Peshmerga fighters stationed in the area had stopped their
advance. There was serious concern about armed classhes between both
sides." Xinhua added,
"Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki criticized authorities of the
country's semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan for preventing Iraqi army
soldiers sent by Baghdad from reaching a border point with Syria located
at a disputed area controlled by Kurdish forces." Al Mada noted that Jabbar Yawar, Secretary-General of the Peshmerga, states these are areas that the Peshmerga naturally patrols. Al Mada also noted
that the Kurdistan Alliance states Nouri is not able to move forces
into the KRG without the consent of the Kurdish Regional
Government. Calling it "the most dangerous escalation and confrontation
between the two sides," Omar al-Saleh (Al Jazeera) reported from Fishkhabur on the Iraq - Syria border.

Omar
al-Saleh: What the Kurdish troops did is they prevented thes troops
from advancing further this way. They blocked it and they sent their
own reinforcements. We even saw some artillery, mortar, rockets and
we've seen heavy -- heavy weapons. And basically what the Iraqi
government has said in a statement is that it's not aimed -- this move,
this troops' movement -- is not aimed at the Kurdish Regional authority
but it wants to prevent any infiltration or any security breaches from
the borders with Syria. Now what the Kurds will tell you is the prime
minister of Iraq is trying to send his troops into a disputed area.

Besides
the usual turf wars universal to different security forces around the
world, there iss also the fear that Nouri would use the issue of the
border crossings in an attempt to install the Iraqi forces permanently
in these areas. That's a valid fear. Considering other power grabs
that he's made, it wouldn't be a stretch. In addition, Nouri probably
has a fear of his own. It wasn't that long ago that Syrian 'rebels'
seized control of the borders (July 19th).
Iraq's not had any cartography or survey done of that area in some
time. They have focused their concerns with regards to the border they
share with Iran due to the fact that Iran insists that land Iraq
considers to be Iraqi land is actually Iranian land. With Syrian
President Bashar Assad, this was not a concern or pressing issue. That
changed when the rebels seized up to four borders. Nouri had no
concern over 'securing the borders' until the 'rebels'

The
speech was a clarification of the crisis between the KRG and Baghdad
and Barzani states that he was compelled to address the basics and shine
a light on the problems. He argues it boils down to the fact that the
Kurds have tried to live in a peaceful coexistence under the Iraqi
Constitution but while some respect the rights and duties of the
Constitution others disregard and dismiss the Constitution to compile a
monopoly of power in their own hands. He states the disagreement
between Nouri al-Maliki and himself is not personal and that Nouri was a
close friend many years ago when he lived in Kurdistan [presumably this
is during Nouri's exile period which also includes stays in Iran and
Syria]. But since 2008 when Nouri sent the Iraqi soldiers and tanks to
Khanaqin in a face-off with the Peshmerga, dialogue has been harder and
harder. He notes that the Constitution's Article 140 has never been
implemented. [This is the Article about disputed territories such as
oil-rich Kirkuk. A census and referendum is supposed to be held. By
the end of 2007. Nouri has refused, for six years now, to implement
Article 140. Nouri is in violation of the Constitution. This issue, by
the way, was seen by the RAND Corporation as the biggest once facing
Iraq.] In addition, Baghdad is not providing the budget for the
Peshmerga, nor is it working on a draft oil and gas law. He notes that
the Erbil Agreement has been evaded and that a true partnership has been
lost. It is as though, he states, they hvae returned to a
dictatorship, following all the ignored promises. In violation of the
rules and laws, he states, Nouri has attempted to grab absolute power
over the administration issues, security issues, the military issues and
the economic ones. This is in violation of the Constitution, he
notes.

He states in his speech that the oil
contracts currently in dispute [ExxonMobil and Chevron] are about issues
that have been spoken of for years and that, for years, there has been
talk of the oil and gas law but still no passage. The KRG will call for
a special committee to review all of the government's files related to
oil in the KRG and Iraq. The Kurds have been patient and waited for
issues to be resolved but they have not been.

On
the political crisis, he states that the failure on Nouri's part to
implement past agreements and Nouri's lack of commitment to the
Constitution led to the move for a withdrawal of confidence in Nouri.
Barzani states he is willing to set that move aside if someone can put
an end to the outstanding issues [seems to echo Moqtada al-Sadr's
statement that all Nouri has to do to stop a vote of no-confidence is to
return to the Erbil Agreement]. The vote can be tabled and Iraq can
return to the right path that will prevent one person from amassing
control and a monopoly of power. That's my translation. The speech
was in Kurdish (which I don't speak or read) and the KRG translated it
to Arabic. There is no English translation provided by the KRG at
present.

The
speech did not achieve the impact it should have, especially as the
crisis escalated and Iraqi soldiers approached the Syrian border close
to Kurdish territories.

As an observer, I
was first of all surprised that the speech was not televised. The
second surprise was that it was in Kurdish. Especially with the recent
escalations of tensions, Iraqi Arab public opinion is very much against
the Kurdish region. The media in Baghad has been full of pro-Maliki
voices to say the least, and they are all depicting Kurds as those who
want everything.

President Barzani's
speech touched on many issues related to the future of Iraq as a whole,
not just as pertains to the Kurds. One of the key points in talks with
Baghdad has been the vision of the country's federal future. But this
is not known to the Arab public.

In the
absence of a strong Kurdish presence in Baghdad's media, a televised
message from President Barzani in Arabic for the people of Iraq would
have explained the Kurdish position to the rest of Iraq. It would have
also been a strong response to Maliki's NRT interview.

President
Massoud Barzani: There's no doubt that the Kurdish question has made a
lot of progress. But I cannot deny that we still face a lot of
challenges. I can however definitely say that the Kurds have passed the
stage where their survival could be threatened. It would be impossible
for us as a people to give up everything we have achieved.

Jane
Arraf: There's a real crisis going on in Iraq and you warned just a few
months ago that if it continues that the Kurdish region could seek its
independence. Are you still prepared to follow through on that?

President
Massoud Barzani: If I can make clear what exactly I said, it's this,
that Iraq is facing a serious and genuine crisis and we have two kinds
of problems. One is a general problem for Iraq as a whole and the other
is problems between the Kurdish region and Baghdad. We've called for
general reforms for the problems -- the Iraqi-wide problems and also the
ones between the Kurdish region and Baghdad. I call upon the Iraqi
leaders, if they are ready and willing to come talk to us. We are ready
to do whatever we can to solve these problems. If the other Iraqi
factions are not ready to follow us, then I will go back to the Kurdish
people and ask them to decide what needs to be done. And I am still
saying the same thing.

Jane
Arraf: And do you feel now, considering that there really hasn't been
much progress between Baghdad and Erbil, do you feel now that you will
go to the Kurdish people in September and ask them in a referendum
whether they want independence?

President
Massoud Barzani: Frankly speaking, the current situation is not
acceptable and we will not allow it to continue. Our people cannot
tolerate it and I'm sure the Iraqi people will not accept it either.
Certainly, at some point, I'd go back to the people but I'd first have
to consult with the political parties in the region. I have to consult
with Parliament. This is not a decision for me to make alone. But
certainly, the moment that we feel disappointed and lose hope of solving
the problems and getting out of this crisis then I will go back to the
people. But before that, I have to consult with the political groups
here and with Parliament.

Nouri,
who has thus far refused to appear before the Parliament for
questioning (he's in violation of the Constitution) has several tricks
he's attempting. Al Rafidayn notes one, Nouri wants to question Barzani before the Parliament.

A
70-year-old man has been sentenced to 15 years in prsion. That's the
verdict handed down by the Iraqi 'legal' system after a 'hearing' that
was shorter than a US traffic court appearance to appeal a speeding
ticket. Amnesty International issues the following alert:

'Grossly unfair' 15-minute court hearing in Ramze Shihab Amhed case relied on 'torture' evidence Amnesty
International has condemned the trial in Iraq of a 70-year-old British
man who has been sentenced to 15 years in prison after a hearing that
lasted only 15 minutes.Ramze Shihab Ahmed, a 70-year-old dual
Iraqi-UK national who has lived in the UK since 2002, was sentenced by a
court in Baghdad on 20 June after being found guilty of "funding
terrorist groups".Amnesty has obtained and examined court
documents and believes the trial proceedings were "grossly unfair". At
his trial, the ninth in a series of trials (he had been acquitted in
each of the earlier ones), Mr Ahmed's lawyer was not given the
opportunity to challenge the prosecution's case, or to cross-examine
prosecution witnesses or call his own witnesses.The court
also failed to exclude from the proceedings a "confession" of Ahmed's,
despite longstanding allegations that this was extracted under torture.
The court relied on information provided by a secret informant, with
Ahmed's lawyer denied an opportunity to challenge this information. In
addition, statements - also allegedly extracted from an individual under
torture and other ill-treatment - were considered in the trial
proceedings.Earlier this month UK Foreign Secretary William
Hague raised Ahmed's case with his counterpart, the Iraqi Foreign
Minister Hoshyar Zebari, while the latter was on a trip to London.
Amnesty has been running a campaign for justice for Ahmed (www.amnesty.org.uk/ramze) and over 6,000 Amnesty supporters have already contacted Mr Hague about Ahmed's plight.Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:"This
is deeply disturbing news. Ramze seems to have been convicted partly on
the basis of a confession that was allegedly beaten out of him."The
sentence comes on the back of what has already been a living nightmare
for Ramze - of secret detention, alleged torture and then a prolonged
trial that was itself grossly unfair."We need to see this
dubious verdict set aside and Ramze either given a proper appeal or for
him to be released and allowed to return home."In November
2009 Ahmed had travelled from the UK to Iraq in an effort to secure the
release of his detained son 'Omar. However, he was himself arrested at
a relative's house in the northern city of Mosul on 7 December 2009.
For nearly four months he was held in a secret prison near Baghdad,
during which time his whereabouts were completely unknown to his family.
During this period Ahmed alleges he was tortured - including with
electric shocks to his genitals and suffocation by plastic bags - into
making a false "confession" to terrorist offences.Ahmed
"reappeared" in late March 2010 when he was able to make a phone call to
his wife Rabiha al-Qassab - a 65-year-old former teaching assistant who
lives in London - imploring her to seek help from the UK authorities.
However, partly on the basis of his "confession", Ahmed was subsequently
put on trial, including on various terrorism charges.

(New
York) – Amnesty International today urged Iraqi authorities to commute
all pending death sentences and impose a moratorium on executions with a
view to abolish the death penalty after the chief of police in the
Iraqi governorate of Anbar announced on Monday a Court of Cassation
decision to uphold 196 death sentences in the region.

It is unclear if the sentences have been ratified by the Iraqi presidency yet.

The announcement gave no timeline for carrying out the executions but expressed a hope that it would be soon.

"After
this alarming announcement, Iraqi authorities must move quickly to
commute all death sentences and declare a moratorium on executions
across the country," said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa
Director at Amnesty International.

"If the
Iraqi authorities carry out these death sentences, they would nearly
quadruple Iraq's already shocking execution record so far this year."

In the first half of 2012 alone, Iraq executed at least 70 people, which is already more than the figure for all of last year.

According
to Amnesty International's information, in 2011 a total of at least 68
people were executed in Iraq. Around the country, hundreds of others are
believed to remain on death row.

The death
penalty was suspended in Iraq after the US-led invasion in 2003 but
restored in August 2004. Since then, hundreds of people have been
sentenced to death and many have been executed.

Amnesty
International opposes the death penalty – the ultimate cruel, inhuman
and degrading punishment – in all cases without exception, as a
violation of the right to life.

Amnesty
International is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning grassroots activist
organization with more than 3 million supporters, activists and
volunteers in more than 150 countries campaigning for human rights
worldwide. The organization investigates and exposes abuses, educates
and mobilizes the public, and works to protect people wherever

justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied.

Thursday, the UN News Centre noted
the UN Special Rapporteur on arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, was
also expressing his alarm and quoted him stating, "It is extremely
disturbing that up to 196 individuals may be at imminent risk of
execution, with a serious lack of public information on the cases. And
this is in a single province of the country." They noted, "He supported
the appeal, made in January 2012, by the UN High Commissioner for Human
Rights, Navi Pillay, for the establishment of a moratorium on the death
penalty." Speaking to the United Nations Security-Council earlier this month, Martin Kobler (UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq) noted:

Mr.
President, Iraq retains the death penalty for a large number of
crimes. I therefore reiterate the call by the Secretary-General [Ban
Ki-moon] and the High Commissioner of Human Rights for the government of
Iraq to establish a moratorium on all executions with a view to their
abolition. I welcome that the authorities of the Kurdistan Region
continue to implement a moratorium on carrying out executions which has
been in place since 2007.

Staying with violence, Dar Addustour notes that the Pope has called out the attacks in Iraq last Monday which resulted in over a hundred deaths. Independent Catholic News reports
that Pope Benedict XVI issued an appeal for peace in Iraq yesterday,
"The Holy Father prayed, 'That this great country find once again the
path toward stability, reconciliation and peace'."

Dan Murphy (Christian Science Monitor) observes, "The Islamic State in Iraq, a Sunni militant group that describes itself as affiliated with Al Qaeda, has been seeking to reassert its presence
in the cities it plagued during the height of Iraq's civil war. Local
officials have long been targeted by insurgents in Iraq, and it's a
problem that really never went away. How many have been murdered over
the years? The number is almost certainly in the thousands, though it
doesn't appear there's ever been a systematic effort to track
assassinations of politicians and local government officials." The
International Crisis Group's Joost Hiltermann writes at CNN:

It's
easy to be distracted by an uptick in violence in Iraq and ignore the
larger political crisis in which al Qaeda, however diminished in its
capabilities, can operate with apparent impunity. Despite last week's
events, violence has been at a steady level since 2008 – too high for
sure to those caught up in the spasms that occur, but sufficiently low
to nonetheless convey a general sense of stability – a vast improvement
over the days of sectarian fighting some years ago. Spectacular attacks
have punctuated a pattern of declining violent incidents, causing mass
casualties even as overall casualty levels have gone down. Shia
militias, which mainly targeted the U.S. presence, put their guns back
under their beds after the military component of that presence came to
an end late last year.Violent
actors such as al Qaeda are likely to be around for some time, but
without a political crisis, they could be contained. Iraqi security
forces are still in the early stages of their development (after the
Bush administration disposed of the former regime's army wholesale), and
still exhibit clear vulnerabilities, especially in intelligence
gathering and coordination that could prevent violent attacks, as well
as in their explosives-detection capacity at checkpoints. (Security
officers employ a piece of equipment that Western experts and
journalists have referred to as a "divining rod" or "magic wand" for its
inability to detect anything.) Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither
will be Iraq, nor its security forces. Yet by and large, these forces
have been able to prevent a serious resurgence of violence.

What
matters in Iraq today isn't so much its sporadic violence, however
spectacular in nature, as the total absence of basic consensus over how
the country should be run, as deepening discord could trigger a new
round of civil war.

Still on violence, Matthew Russell Lee (Inner City Press) reports
the UN's use of private contractors in Iraq and quotes Martin Kobler
stating in an e-mail to him, "I would like to add that UNAMI is spending
approximately USD 1.73 million in 2012 on static security provided by
private security companies in Iraq, Jordan and Kuwait. The contract for
the SAIT training, which is conducted by a private security company, is
for up to USD 1,182,771.50 in 2012."

Acting Chair Blake Farenthold: I just have one more question so we'll just do a quick second round of questions. Ambassador Kennedy, you mentioned the Baghdad police college
annex facility as one of the facilities. It's my understanding that
the United States' taxpayers have invested more than $100 million in
improvements on that site. It was intended to house the police department program -- a multi-billion dollar effort that's currently
being downsized. And as a result of the State Dept's failure to secure
land use rights the entire facility is being turned over to the Iraqis
at no cost.

We've covered
it already a month ago. It will wait until tomorrow. Emily Alpert gets
a link because she's hard working and two friends at the paper asked
for it.

Turning to the US presidential election, as we noted in "Roundtable" at Third, there was big news over the weekend. Roseanne Barr,
who is making an independent run for the presidency, announced her
running mate. Cindy Sheehan, probably the most famous peace advocate in
this country in the last decade, is Rosanne's choice.

Roseanne
earlier made a run for the Green Party presidential nomination.
There's a good chance she would have won if people had known she was
serious about it. (She declared at the start of her run that she was
just running to garner attention for the Green Party and that she would
support Jill Stein.) During her run, at some point, she decided she
needed to make a real run because she obviously believes she can make a
difference (whether that's in the race and in office or just in the
race, I don't know). She's not alone in feeling that way. Cindy
Sheehan has had supportive words for Jill Stein in the past. So has
Green Party member Cat Woods. But if you check the press release announcing Cindy is Roseanne's running mate, you'll see Cat Woods is the contact person.

Jill
Stein has the Green Party nomination. She also has several obstacles
against her that she has placed in her own path this month. No one's to
blame for that except for her as we explained in "Touring the online campaign offices."
Roseanne is not her 'problem.' Roseanne is running for public office
and is Jill Stein's rival, Mitt Romney's rival, Barack Obama's rival,
Jerry White's rival and Gary Johnson's rival. None of them own anyone's
vote. Every vote should be up for grabs and go to the person a voter
feels will best represent them.

Jill Stein needs a campaign blogger. She doesn't have one. She might want to consider Ian Wilder (On The Wilder Side) who writes with passion and clarity and is supporting her campaign. Yesterday Ian noted:

It's a leap year, so CODEPink/UFPJ's* Tom
Hayden must be shilling for a warmonger again. Obama has opposed any
Wall Street reform, and his Homeland Security Department coordinated the
shutdown of Occupy in the US just as Hayden & MoveOn helped
coordinate the shutdown of the peace movement in 2008, Hayden's new
article gives Obama credit for Bush's plan to shut down the Iraq war.
Not surprising since Obama has followed the Bush path on so many
issues, to the point of being called Bush's 3rd term. Tom Hayden totally misses the point.

Roseanne
Barr announced that Cindy Sheehan will be her running mate in her bid
for the Peace and Freedom Party's nomination for President. Sheehan is
an anti-war activist who first gained national attention for her protest
camp outside then-President Bush's Texas ranch.

Barr
said, "Cindy and I are the 'Throw the Bums Out' ticket and the 'Ballot
Access' ticket. We want people to register in the Peace and Freedom
Party so that the party can keep its ballot status in California." After
the passage of the 'Top Two primary" in 2010, alternative political
parties lost one of their ways of staying on the ballot. The Peace and
Freedom Party needs approximately 40,000 more registrants to maintain
its ballot status beyond 2014. "We also want people to start Peace and
Freedom Parties in other states," added Barr.

Former
Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who has been working closely
with Barr on this campaign, commented, "Access to the ballot is a civil
rights issue that needs attention across the country. If voters only
have two choices, both of which represent the same interests, then we
don't really have a democracy." McKinney went on to describe a higher
standard of democracy, "When I was in Congress, I promoted proportional
representation for legislatures. This is the only way to make our
democracy representative of the people, rather than the corporate
donors."

The
Peace & Freedom Party nominating convention takes place on Saturday
August 4th in Los Angeles. Cat Woods, an officer of the Peace &
Freedom Party, echoed Barr on the party's emphasis on ballot access. She
said that the party hoped to "draw attention to the ongoing erosion of
alternative parties' access to the ballot and how this directly deprives
voters of control of their government."

When
asked whether she supported the Barr ticket, Woods added, "Our party
needs to reach a wider audience with its message of socialist solutions.
Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan can bring that."

Responding
to charges that she could "steal votes" from Obama or "spoil the
election," Barr said, "The American people are sick and tired of this
'lesser evil' garbage they get fed every election year. Both the
Democrats and the Republicans do the same evils once they're in office.
I'm here to tell the voters: if you want to tell the government and the
two domineering parties that you're sick and tired of all their evil,
register in the Peace and Freedom Party and vote for me and Cindy."

To contact the Roseanne for President campaign, contact campaign@roseanneforpresident.org

Friday, July 27, 2012

I don't like articles about racism per se. If someone wants to talk about their experience, I always want to listen. And if someone wants to write intelligently about racism, great, I can't wait to read it.

But this Black woman doesn't care for magazines that do stories about racism a lot of the time.

And I'm thinking, I see 32 faces listed as writing staff for this magazine and not one is Black. So are they really in the position to call anyone else racist?

What magazine?

That's the other thing. Why don't they take their damn nose out of business?

It was The New Statesman. If you don't know the magazine it might be because it's a British magazine. It's become worthless in the last weeks as its become an apologist for Tony Blair. But I really don't need a White Britty telling me what they think are racist dog-whistles.

They want to do something about racism?

Here's a suggestion for The Progressive and The New Statesman: Hire some Black writers.

Friday, July 27, 2012. Chaos and
violence continue, the US has wasted over 20 billion tax payer dollars on
training Iraq security forces, as they refuse to address that the press and
pundits push and push for more war, Hilton Worldwide's building a hotel in Iraq,
and more.

Hilton Worldwide today announced expansion plans in Iraqi
Kurdistan, Northern Iraq, with the signing of a management agreement with the
Mihtab Group to develop the first Hilton Hotels & Resorts property in the
rapidly growing city of Erbil, Iraq.

The 300-room Hilton Erbil Hotel & Spa, which is expected to
open in 2016, will be the second Hilton Worldwide property in Erbil following
the 2011 announcement to develop a DoubleTree Suites by Hilton in the city.

Hilton Erbil Hotel & Spa will be set in extensive, landscaped
grounds in an upscale residential and commercial district just North of Erbil,
an area famous for its picturesque, mountainous landscape as well as its close
proximity to the city's main access road. These key location benefits are
attracting many new businesses to the area, including a number of foreign
embassies planned within the next two years.

The KRG is not hurting for hotels. Already it has a ton including the
Erbil Tower Hotel, Divan Erbil, Van Royal Hotel, Erbil Rotana (where this
year's Miss Kurdistan competition was held), Yadi Hotel, Abu-Sana Hotel, etc.
The KRG has 22 operating, internationally recognized hotels with more being
built. Baghdad? Five operating and internationally recognized hotels --
including the Palestine International Hotel (where reporters stayed and where
the US military infamously fired upon). No big construction going on. No big
foreign investment rushing into the capitol. But the KRG? Hilton Worldwide
becomes the latest to want to do business.

As we've noted repeatedly, Nouri's crazy scares them off. Nouri's tirades
against Turkey, all the accusations and smears add in to the view of him as
unhinged. His attacks on ExxonMobil and Chevron and so many others and his
inability, as prime minister, to bring cohesion to Iraq, to provide real
leadership to the region, hurts the country and harms the way others view the
section of Iraq he has jurisdiction over. (The KRG -- Kurdistan Regional
Government -- three northern provinces -- is semi-autonomous.)

After all this time, an argument could be made that Baghdad 'security' --
such as it is -- is as good as it's going to get and that the business community
has taken note of that. Making that argument requires acknowleging how very
little Nouri al-Maliki has accomplished in his six years as prime minister.
Acknowledging that requires confronting how little Nouri has achieved as prime
minister and how much the people continue to suffer.

Ahmed Hussein (Al Mada) reports that
along with the continued lack of electritiy, you can add to that the scarcity of
potable water in Baghdad -- specifically east Baghdad and South Baghdad. The
situation has gotten so bad that Parliament will be questioning the governor of
the province and the secretary of the city of Baghdad. The newspaper notes
that, July 7th, officials pleaded "technical problems." That was 20 days ago.

The delivery of basic goods and services is a political issue and the
potable water appears to have entered the same crisis level the political
stalemate has. Al Mada reports on Ayad Allawi's statements yesterday.
Allawi is the head of Iraqiya (the political slate that came in first in the
elections, Nouri's State of Law came in second). Allawi notes that there is no
need for a Reform Committee or for people to think up or adopt new reforms. The
answer is to return to the Erbil Agreement which was already agreed
upon.

Following the March 2010 elections, Political Stalemate I lasted
for a little over eight months and this was the period where Nouri refused to
allow things to move forward because he wanted a second term as prime minister;
however, State of Law's showing didn't allow him -- per the law -- to be made
prime minister-designate and given 30 days to assmble a Cabinet. So he pouted
and threw his tantrum and the White House nursed him and refused to pull him off
Barack's nipple. With the White House backing, Nouri was able to bring things
in Iraq to a complete standstill. The White House then brokered the Erbil
Agreement which was the way around the Constitution (it was
extra-Constitutional, not unconstitutional) for Nouri to get his
way.

That's not how the US government presented it. The political blocs
were told to figure out what they wanted and this items were written into the
agreement with the understanding that, in exchange for those, Nouri would get a
second term. The agreement is a binding contract and was signed off on by all
parties. Plus the US government assured the political blocs that the US was
backing this agreement. That was November 2010. The next day, Parliament
finally held a real session and Nouri was named prime minister-designate. When
he became prime minister, he trashed the agreement and, since summer 2011,
Moqtada al-Sadr, the Kurds and Iraqiya have been calling for him to return to
the Erbil Agreement.

He has refused.

That's what the current
political stalemate is about. He is not only doing a power-grab, he is refusing
to honor the contract he signed onto and used to get a second term as prime
minister. He has further alarmed rival politicians by going back on his
'pledge' not to seek a third term.

So Allawi is calling for a return to
the Erbil Agreement. He sees Nouri's silly Reform Commission as a waste of time
-- which it is. Why do they need weeks of meetings to figure out what to
do?

Have we forgotten the months of meetings for the national conference
that then fell apart as Nouri wanted it to? Before that fell apart in April,
there had been months of meetings about this issue. So the Reform Commission
shouldn't need a ton of meetings to figure out what to do.

But the
reality is it exists solely to buy more time for Nouri. This is what he always
does, stall, stall and stall. And hope people either get tired of waiting or
just forget.

Due to backing from the Bush White House and then the Barack
White House, this strategy has been highly effective for Nouri
personally.

It's helped tear the country of Iraq further apart but, for
Nouri, it's all about what Nouri al-Maliki wants. Further proof is in reporting today by Rod Nordland (New York
Times) about 15 Baquba officials quitting their jobs because they state
the government has failed to protect them from al Qaeda. Threat have made them
fear for the safety of their families. This lack of security despite all the US
tax dollars wasted in training Iraq's security forces.

"Status of Fixcal Years 2011-2012
Iraq Security Forces Fund (SIGIR 12-018)" [PDF format warning, click here] was released today by the Office of the Special
Inspector General on Iraq Reconstruction and is a letter to Secretary of
Defense Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillar Clinton which notes the money
given (wasted) by US taxpayers for Iraq's security forces to be trained: "To
date, Congress has appropriated $20.54 billion in ISFF. This includes $1.50
billion Congress appropriated in April 2011 for use in fiscal years (FY) 2011
and 2012."

Over $20.54 billion US tax dollars sent out of the US to pay for the
training of Iraq's security forces. You learn about how freely the government spent the
taxpayer money. So freely, that they gave more than even they thought could be
spent which is why: "Congress specified the period of time each ISFF
appropriation could be used. In each case, Congress made the funds available
for periods between 12 and 19 months, during which time funds would have to be
obligated. Any funds not obligated with their designated period of availability
would be considered expired and, therefore, not available for new
obligations."

Nancy Pelosi kept
using the "blank check" metaphor even after many of us thought the then-Speaker
sounded ancient and ourselves were referring to it as the administration using
Congress as its own personal ATM. But Pelosi ends up right and we (including
me) end up wrong because it was indeed a blank check. And it was blank check
under Bush and a blank check under Barack.

While Americans domestically struggled with historic
levels of unemployment, with losing their houses and so much more, the Congress
and the White House were so eager to give Iraq billions for 'security forces'
that they realized they might be giving more than was needed so they tacked on
that if the funds were not "obligated" within X number of months, the US would
get them back.

And some may wrongly think that means, "Well, Iraq
didn't spend X so we're getting that back. Yea!" Wrong. "Spent" is not
"obligated."

"Obligated" means they say it will be spent on, for
example, "forensic training."

Will be. Not has been spent.

This is made clear in the letter: "However, un-obligated funds can be used for up to
five years after they expire to pay for authorized increases to existing
obligations made from the same appropriation. Any un-obligated funds remaining
after the five-year period must be returned to the U.S.
Treasury."

So the White House and the Congress (then
Democratically controlled, both houses) made the decision not only to give Iraq
more money than was needed, they also said, "Hey, screw the American taxpayers
and their needs, if you can't spend this money in the Fiscal Year, just say you
will someday spend it on something and we'll let you have it for up to five
years, interest free."

$20.54 billion US tax dollars
wasted.

Wasted?

What do you see in Iraq in terms of security that
justifies spending 20 billion dollars -- $20,000,000,000?

The CIA estimates the Iraqi population to be 31.1 million. (Iraq
hasn't had a census since the 90s.) When the US government refers to Iraq's
"security forces," they are only speaking of the number employed by the central
government out of Baghdad. So all of this money has just spent on the national
forces. In a country with an estimate population of 30 million, how many
security forces are there?

By September 2007, according to Brookings, they had 359,700. In the same month,
Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post noted
that then-top US commander in Iraq Gen David Petraeus was using a higher figure
of 445,000 at that same time and that this "suggest[s] he was including every
person employed by the ministries in an effort to promote the size and
capability of security forces that many experts say are plagued by absenteeism,
attrition and sectarianism." Last December 7th, Luis Martinez (ABC News)
reported US Lt Gen Frank Helmick had stated in the US military's "last
briefing from Iraq" that Iraq's security forces number 700,000.

30 million population, nearly a million police officers. Iraq is not
Malaysia. It's an oil rich country generating billions each year. How very
fortunate for the US-installed puppet Nouri that these forces he's put under his
own command -- not really how the Iraqi Constitution set it out -- were trained
on the US tax payer dollar.

Please grasp that this figure doesn't include
the $850 million that the US State Dept requested (and received) for Fiscal Year
2012 to, yes, train Iraq's security forces. And the 'good' news on that money?
The letter explains that, after allocation, "the funds will be deposited into an
Iraq FMF account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York where the GOI
[Government Of Iraq] will decide how to use the funds."

And when you look
over how that money's being allocated, you'll see that the US tax payer foots
the bill for everything from night vision goggles to "training ammunition."
Again, Iraq is not a struggling economy. It's not Ethiopia. It's an oil rich
country that make billions every month in oil revenue.

But Nouri can't provide security and can't even pick up the bill for
the security forces he has placed under his control. Who's safe in Iraq besides
Nouri? Who's benefitted from all those billions spent on security?

On efforts to end -- or pretend to end -- the crisis Nouri started,
Al Mada reports that the National Alliance
is warning that the Reform Committee lacks "a magic wand." No one expected them
to have a magic wand. People are more upset that they (a) have no teeth, (b)
have no power and (c) are a for-show group. This evening, Alsumaria reported that State of Law was stating
Deputy Prime Minister and Iraqiya member Saleh al-Mutlaq was supporting the
Reform Commission. If true, this could be the most serious fracture Iraqiya has
faced. They've written off the loss of members since the elections. This would
be a high ranking member betraying them. Saleh al-Mutlaq, it should be
remembered was tarred and feathered by Nouri's Justic and Accountability
Commission in 2010 as a "Ba'athist." As such, he wasn't allowed to run in the
elections. Iraqiya stood by him throughout that. In the second-half of
December of last year, Nouri was attempting to strip al-Mutlaq of his position
as a result of an interview al-Mutlaq gave CNN where he comapred Nouri to a
dictator. Iraqiya stood behind him collectively and that was among the reasons
he retained his office. So a defection like this -- even if he remained in
Iraqiya -- would be a major turn -- and a major betrayal.

International leaders and the press betrayed Iraq and the citizens of the
world by building a false case for the illegal war. Some of those international
leaders never really leave the daily buzz. Take George W. Bush. PTI reports that the Dalai Lama has declared he and George W.
Bush ad BFFs and, "Personally I love Bush but I have reservation on his policy
towards Iraq." Personally, I was neutral on the Dalai Lama until a few years
ago when he decided to let his homophobia run wild. After that, very little
about the 'peaceful' Dalai Lama can surprise me -- not even his desire to be
best friends with a War Criminal.

From Bush, who occupied the White House from January 2001 through January
2009. In England, the chief War Criminal was then-prime minister Tony
Blair. Former British diplomat Craig Murray observes at his site, "Blair's
latest attempt at rehabilitation is a discussion tomorrow at Westminister
Central Hall with the Archbishop of Canterbury on the place of religion in
society. A vexed question, but give that Blair believes God OK'd the invasion
of Iraq and the resulting millions deaths, not one that can usefully be
discussed by this charlatan." Meanwhile in England, Richard Norton-Taylor (Guardian)
reports, efforts continue to hide evidence from the public about how Blair
and Bush planned or 'planned' the illegal war:

The Foreign Office (FCO) is appealing against a judge's ruling that
extracts of a conversation between Tony Blair and George Bush days before the invasion
of Iraq must be
disclosed.

It argues that revealing Blair's comments to Bush on the telephone
on 12 March 2003 would present a "significant danger" to UK-US relations. It
would lead to the US withholding information from Britain in the future,
damaging Britain's security and diplomatic interests, the FCO
says.

First: Think about it for a second. Strategically and militarily,
it made no sense for Saddam to transfer his weapons of mass destruction to
Syria. Saddam worked on acquiring WMD for a reason: to stave off an invasion and
hold on to power.

Just listen to a defeated Saddam for a second. In a post-invasion
interview, Saddam admitted that he had been
bluffing about his WMD. This is actually case-closed for
the conspiracy theories about his weapons transfers.

But for a moment, let’s suppose that Saddam circumvented the
most intrusive sanction regime
the world has ever known and rebuilt his WMD programs after
inspectors (and Israeli jets) destroyed them. His reasoning would have been
deterrence — as Thomas Schelling put it, Saddam would have given his enemies a
“threat that leaves something to
chance.” That’s why the Assad regime threatens on and off to use WMD: It keeps
the foreign hordes at bay. So why, with U.S. massing forces on his border, would
Saddam give up the one thing he had to raise the cost of invading to the
Americans?

At Antiwar.com, John Glaser takes on the
idiot and evil Seth Jones (evil? he taught counter-insurgency at the university
level) and Jones' ridiculous attempts to build support for a Syrian War.
Excerpt.

Well then genius, it might have been good not to have initiated
regime change, no? US support for the rebel militias has emboldened the
opposition, deepened the conflict, and allowed extremist insurgents to
destabilize the Assad regime. Jones admits that one thing explaining al-Qaeda’s
rise in Syria is “the draw of a new jihad—smack in the middle of the Arab
world.” Like in Iraq, the US has helped create an al-Qaeda presence in Syria,
which is now justifying even more military intervention.

Jones’s position is pitifully confused. Which policy is the US
supposed to pursue in Syria – supporting the rebels in a proxy war against
Assad, or fighting the rebels and eliminating the main threat to Assad’s regime?
This isn’t quantum mechanics; we can’t exist in two different realities at once.
Or are we just supposed to take any excuse to intervene at face
value?

Jones is also contradictory: He admits al-Qaeda fighters are
swarming to Syria because of the draw of jihad. Yet, he wants to “launch a
covert campaign to ramp up intelligence-collection efforts against al Qaeda,
capture or kill its senior leaders, and undermine its legitimacy.” Right,
because nothing snuffs out al-Qaeda like an unprovoked US war in the Middle
East.

Counter-insurgency is war on a native population through intimidation and
deceit -- the US generally mixes in violence as well. So the question to ask is
someone trained in deception should really be allowed to write opinion columns?
Do we really need domestic psyops on the op-ed pages of our daily newspapers in
this country?

Syria’s citizens are now another nation reduced to tragic turmoil
resultant from being targeted in the post 11 September 2001 Pentagon plan to
“take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia,
Sudan and finishing off with Iran”, as described by General
Wesley Clark.

US planned carnage in sovereign Syria was a bit behind schedule,
but now back on track -- if out of predicted sequence — with another wannabe
Crusader in the White House, this one with a Nobel Peace Prize. Fact mirrors
fiction’s wildest darknesses, and from the “Nile to the Euphrates” the regions’
residents increasingly have only the most uncertain and tenuous places to
hide.

Syria, with population of under 23 million, is also host to nearly
half a million Palestinian refugees and the largest influx of Iraqi refugees in
the world, a minimum of 1.2 million, who fled the US-UK’s liberating bombs,
bullets, kidnappings, rapes, murders, ethnic cleansing, looting and
mayhem.

The UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) reports that “Syria has been a
generous host to Iraqi refugees.”

As the War Hawks get their jollies, life is forever destroyed for the
people on the ground -- the ones that an alleged humanitarian impulse is
screaming must be saved. From IRIN:

Thousands of Iraqi refugees returning from Syria will face huge
challenges reintegrating into a country with high rates of unemployment, dismal
basic services and ongoing sectarian strife. “I think we will face a
humanitarian crisis regarding this issue,” said Yaseen Ahmed Abbas, the
president of the Iraq Red Crescent (IRC). “You should expect pressure on
everything in Iraq by having such a large number of people in a short time. It’s
not easy.”

More than 15,000 Iraqis have returned to Iraq in the past nine
days, after unprecedented fighting in the Syrian capital Damascus, according to
Deputy Minister of Displacement and Migration Salam Dawod Al Khafagy. The
government evacuated 4,000 by air, he said; the rest crossed by land. Tens of
thousands of others have returned since the Syrian conflict started in March
2011.

Elham was one of them. After seven years in Syria, she and her son
returned on 3 July to Iraq, where she says she has nothing: “I am like a
stranger here.”

After a few nights in a hotel, her money has run out and she is now
staying with friends, she told IRIN. Her family home, abandoned years ago, then
occupied, and now empty, is “not fit for living”, she says, and she has no
capital to rebuild it. Her parents have since died and transferring the home
into her name is another hurdle, she said.

Rami Ruhayem (BBC News -- link is video) reports,
"The Iraqi authorities crammed them together in local schools and government
buildings and imposed strict restrictions on their movement. A Syrian refugee
tells BBC, "Our main demand is to leave this prison and go to our relatives. If
they don't let us out, we will return to our houses in Syria, whether they like
it or not." Of the Syrian refugees, UNICEF notes:

Some people have taken displaced families into their own homes. One
woman I know, Manal, who has two children of her own, has been hosting her
extended family from Homs in her house for the past three months. Recently they
all had to relocate, and took refuge in a school. Such generosity is becoming
harder to sustain. Many shops are closed, so it is difficult for local residents
to buy enough food and other basics to meet their own needs, let alone those of
their guests.

Conditions in the schools are not easy, either. In one school in
Masaken Barzeh, around 600 people are using just seven small toilets. The new
residents do their best to keep the school clean. But they need cleaning
supplies and awareness-raising about the importance of good hygiene. UNICEF is helping by
supplying hygiene kits that contain detergents, shampoos, sanitary napkins,
soap, towels and other personal hygiene items.

Sometimes the children themselves step up to help. I came across
14-year-old Maya who, along with seven other family members, had been relocated
twice. She calls herself a “hygiene expert.” Volunteers were so impressed with
her knowledge that it was agreed that Naya would be the school’s focal point for
hygiene awareness. Naya promised to spend her free time going around telling
other children about proper hygiene. “Younger kids listen to me, but I’m not
sure about the grown-ups,” Naya laughed.

Another problem is keeping the children occupied. It is too hot to
run around in the yard, and there is nothing to play with. UNICEF is providing
the schools with recreational kits and sports kits through its local
partners.

Violence continues in Iraq. With only a few days remaining in the month,
Iraq Body
Count notes that at least 376 people have been killed from violence in Iraq
through yesterday. The United Nations counted 401 deaths last month. Iraq is
on track to meet that figure or even surpass it. (The official Iraqi government
numbers -- which the press ran with -- were much lower.) Today Alsumaria reports a Baghdad sticky bombing has
claimed 1 life. It has been a very violent month in Iraq. Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) adds, "Twelve more militants were killed in clashes in Hadid.
Yesterday, gunmen had managed to kill 12 security members, including one person
on a helicopter that was forced to make a hard landing. " Rudaw notes, "On
Friday the ministry of Peshmerga said that the Iraqi government had
sent troops to the border strip between Syria and the Kurdistan Region
and that 3,000 Peshmerga fighters stationed in the area had stopped
their advance.

Intelligence sources say the Islamic
State of Iraq terror network is in dire financial straits and that attacks are
increasingly become contract killings. "Terror in Iraq is politically
motivated," says Yonadam Kanna, one of the few Christian members of the Iraqi
parliament. The government has been in a perpetual state of crisis since the US
withdrew its troops at the end of 2011. In vain, the opposition has for months
tried to enforce a vote of no-confidence against Shiite Prime Minister Nuri
al-Maliki. They accuse him of assuming too much power while trying to keep Sunni
Muslims at bay. Maliki's State of Law party is the second-strongest party in
parliament; the bloc headed by his opponent Iyad Allawi has one seat more but
failed to form a governing majority.Two years ago, Maliki signed a
coalition treaty for a "government of national unity" with various Shiite
parties and Kurds. The agreement promised key ministries to Allawi, who was also
to head a new security and surveillance agency. But none of the above ever
materialized. Maliki is acting head of the interior and defense ministries and
talk of a new security agency has ceased. Like Maliki, Allawi is a Shiite, but
he enjoys the support of most Sunni parties. Tensions between the two
politicians have for months paralyzed development in Iraq - everything but the
oil sector has ground to a halt. The country has reached an economic and
political standstill spelling disaster for the population.

Notice how the topic circles back to the stalemate. It has to because
Nouri's inability to honor his agreements has left many in Iraq feeling
disenfranchised and not willing to trust him anymore. That goes a long way
towards explaining the present violence.